I'll give an example, to make my question a bit more clear.
If I have e 12Mpx camera (D700, always shooting in raw format), the highest possible resolution is 4256 × 2832. Obviously, in most cases, if the image size is reduced, say twice (to 2128 x 1416), the picture would look much better (on the screen at least, 100% view).
2128 x 1416 printed using 160 DPI would give 13.3 x 8.85 inches.
Similar thing can be achieved by simly increasing the DPI twice.
So, 4256 × 2832 printed using 320 DPI would give again 13.3 x 8.85 inches.
The final sizes are the same. Here are my concerns:
- obviously, higher DPI means more details (but ...)
- but reducing the size of the image will "hide" some "bad" things (would look like the noise is less, the image is sharper, more contrast, etc.
So, these 2 things make me think, reducing the size and printing at lower DPI would be better or I'm wrong?
Of course, combing both things will be best (I think), but this will make the print smaller that I'd like it to be.
I know for large prints, if looked from some distance, 320 is not necessary, but I'm talking about some small prints, like ones for album (like A4 and smaller). My point is - the prints will be watched really close.
I can't easily test this and even if I could, I think this would depend on the printer. That's why I decided to ask for advice.
Please consider - the printer is professional and much higher DPI can be used.